Filed: Oct. 02, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-1481 _ Douglas W. Haskins, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Russell Rogerson, * Southern District of Iowa. * Appellee. * [UNPUBLISHED] _ Submitted: October 1, 2001 Filed: October 2, 2001 _ Before HANSEN, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Douglas W. Haskins shot his wife and was sentenced to three consecutive terms of imprisonment after an Iowa jury found him guilty of multiple
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 01-1481 _ Douglas W. Haskins, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Russell Rogerson, * Southern District of Iowa. * Appellee. * [UNPUBLISHED] _ Submitted: October 1, 2001 Filed: October 2, 2001 _ Before HANSEN, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Douglas W. Haskins shot his wife and was sentenced to three consecutive terms of imprisonment after an Iowa jury found him guilty of multiple ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 01-1481
___________
Douglas W. Haskins, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
Russell Rogerson, * Southern District of Iowa.
*
Appellee. * [UNPUBLISHED]
___________
Submitted: October 1, 2001
Filed: October 2, 2001
___________
Before HANSEN, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Douglas W. Haskins shot his wife and was sentenced to three consecutive
terms of imprisonment after an Iowa jury found him guilty of multiple offenses. He
argued on direct appeal, as he does in this 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 proceeding, that his trial
counsel was ineffective for failing to assert a double jeopardy challenge to the
imposition of consecutive prison terms. See State v. Haskins,
573 N.W.2d 39, 42-44
(Iowa Ct. App. 1997) (en banc). Like the district court, we find the decision of the
Iowa Court of Appeals was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of,
clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court. See Siers v.
Weber,
259 F.3d 969, 972 (8th Cir. 2001) (standard of review).
Accordingly, we affirm the denial of habeas relief. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-